PRIME MINISTER
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Myles
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 9 February.
The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)
This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today. This evening I hope to have an audience of her Majesty the Queen.
Mr. Myles
During her busy schedule, and even while she relaxes a little, will my right hon. Friend recall her visit to Glenfarclas distillery, when she was presented with the problems of the Scots whisky industry? Will she, as First Lord of the Treasury, prevent any swingeing increase [column 854]in duty on this doyen of the drink trade, which would jeopardise jobs from the maltings to the blending and bottling plants?
The Prime Minister
I recognise the spirit of my hon. Friend's question and the strength of feeling with which he asks it. The proportion of tax to total cost of a bottle of whisky is now slightly lower than it was at the end of the Labour Administration.
Mr. Foot
Did the right hon. Lady have a chance yesterday or today to study the extremely alarming letter that was published in The Times from the Chief Medical Officer of Health about lead poisoning from petrol? Does she accept the view that brain damage to hundreds of thousands of children might be involved and does she not believe that, in reviewing the letter, much more urgent action must be taken by the Government to deal with the problem?
The Prime Minister
I know of the letter, but the right hon. Gentleman will recollect that last May my right hon. Friend Tom Kingthe Minister for Local Government and Environmental Services announced a wide-ranging package of measures designed to reduce further people's exposure to environmental pollution by lead. The measures included a reduction in the maximum permitted amount of lead added to petrol from 0.4 grams per litre to 0.15 grams per litre by the end of 1985. That was the earliest date by which the oil industry could make the necessary changes to its refineries.
The Government's decision closely reflected Sir Henry 's views and the reduction schedule gives us the earliest possible substantial reduction in petrol lead emissions that he recommended. Wholly lead-free petrol could be introduced in the United Kingdom only in the long term, because the present generation of cars on British roads could not use it. New engines would have to be designed and brought into service. As the car manufacturing, industry is Europe-wide, a change in British industry would be impossible without prior agreement with other European countries.
Mr. Foot
Is the right hon. Lady really telling the House that the statement to which she has referred took full account of such a report from the Chief Medical Officer of Health, with the alarming prospects that he underlined? Why cannot Britain take the same steps to protect children from damage as are taken in the United States of America, Japan, Sweden, Australia and many other countries?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman will recognise that more steps have been taken by the Conservative Government than by any previous Government to reduce the lead content of petrol. As I thought that this question might be raised I inquired carefully. I repeat that the decision announced by my right hon. Friend in May 1981 closely reflected Sir Henry's views. If the right hon. Gentleman had listened to my last point about the design of cars in Europe and the need for a Europe-wide agreement, he would know the answer to the second part of his question.
Mr. Rathbone
May I ask the Prime Minister, on behalf of my constituent, Sir Freddie Laker, although not at his request, and on behalf of his employees and the users of Laker Airways, whether she can spare a moment in her busy day to consider the extension by two months of Laker [column 855]Airways' operator's certificate and route licenses, without which its future is likely to be very non-assured and all its efforts will come to nothing?
The Prime Minister
I well understand my hon. Friend's concern. As he knows, I am a Freddie Laker fan. Whatever Sir Freddie's difficulties now are, nothing can take away from the great service that he has performed in giving the possibility of travel to people who never dreamed that they would have it. I think that my hon. Friend's specific point relates to the announcement that the licences may have been suspended, or notice given that they are to be suspended within six days. The operative word is “suspension” . I understand that they can be “de-suspended” , if that is the right word——
Mr. Cryer
It is not a word at all, really.
The Prime Minister
—and that, naturally, the suspension would be terminated if there were a reasonable possibility of Laker Airways being sold in its entirety to someone who could continue to operate it as it was operated.
Mr. David Steel
Returning to the previous question, as the Government are giving four years' notice to both the international oil industry and the international motor car industry, why do we not take the opportunity afforded by that notice to require completely lead-free petrol at the end of that time?
The Prime Minister
I draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to what I said towards the end of my lengthy and considered answer. The present generation of cars on United Kingdom roads could not use lead-free petrol. New engines would have to be designed and brought into service. As the car manufacturing industry is Europe-wide, the change would be impossible for British industry without prior agreement among the European countries concerned.
Obviously, we are very concerned about the reported effect of lead. That is why we have taken action with regard to lead in petrol. We shall, of course, consider any further measures, but we have to do so in agreement with Europe. We must also consider the wider effect that I mentioned.
Mr. Speaker
Order. There is a constituency question before we return to the open questions.
Cruden Bay
Q2. Mr. McQuarrie
asked the Prime Minister if she will make an official visit to Cruden Bay in the East Aberdeenshire constituency.
The Prime Minister
I have at present no plans to do so.
Mr. McQuarrie
I regret that my right hon. Friend has no plans to visit Cruden Bay, where she would be most welcome. Is she aware that loss of development area status in the Grampian region, which includes Cruden Bay, is having a penal effect upon employment in the indigenous industries in my constituency? Will she find time to meet her right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland to discuss bringing forward the review, which at present is not due to be brought forward until August?
The Prime Minister
I am sorry that I cannot visit my hon. Friend's constituency, but I am glad to tell him that [column 856]my right hon. Friend George Youngerthe Secretary of State is now embarking on the review and hopes to be able to announce the results in the spring. I am sure that he will take into account the views of my hon. Friend and of the interested local authorities.
Engagements
Q3. Mr. Robert Atkins
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 9 February.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Atkins
Is my right hon. Friend aware of the concern of Conservative Members about statements, such as those emanating from NATO recently, which suggest that the RAF will be “light” by 100 planes by the end of this year? Will she prevail upon her right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to allow greater flexibility within the defence budget so that we may fulfil our election pledges on defence as well as assure the jobs and stability of our world-beating aerospace and defence industries?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is about right on the reduction in aircraft by mid-1982. The reduction relates to Vulcans, Canberras, Shackletons and Buccaneers, but he has, perhaps, forgotten that my right hon. Friend John Nottthe Secretary of State for Defence told the House more than a year ago about the early withdrawal of older aircraft types in order to preserve the major investment programme about which my hon. Friend is rightly concerned. We are fulfilling our election pledges and also the NATO pledge.
I should point out to my hon. Friend that defence procurement has increased considerably under the Conservative Government. We took over from the Labour Government a procurement programme of £2.9 billion. This year the figure is £5.5 billion, so we are really doing our stuff on defence procurement and honouring our election pledges.
On my hon. Friend's last point, we recognised the advantages to programme managers of introducing some form of end-year flexibility in respect of capital or equivalent expenditure—[Hon. Members: “Too long” ]—and my right hon. Friend Leon Brittanthe Chief Secretary is looking at this again. [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker
Order. There is so much noise that I cannot hear the Prime Minister. She is entitled to complete her answer.
Mr. James Callaghan
On a related question, is the Prime Minister aware that the Government's decisions to withdraw and pay off HMS “Endurance” when she returns from the South Atlantic is an error that could have serious consequences? Is she further aware that this stale old proposition was put to me on more than one occasion when I was Prime Minister and after considering it I turned it down flat? Will she please do the same?
The Prime Minister
I recognise that this was a very difficult decision for my right hon. Friend John Nottthe Secretary of State for Defence. The right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that there are many competing claims on the defence budget, even though we are increasing it substantially. He will also know that the defence capability [column 857]of that ship is extremely limited. My right hon. Friend therefore felt that other claims on the defence budget should have greater priority.
Mr. Butcher
Bearing in mind that British Rail loses £2 million per day even when fully operational, does my right hon. Friend agree that the further deterioration of its financial position as a result of the current dispute provides an overwhelming reason for privatisation of its activities both within and outside the rail network?
The Prime Minister
I wholly agree with my hon. Friend that there are many aspects of British Rail that could yet be privatised. Some have already been privatised, but I hope that British Rail will press ahead with further privatisation measures. I also wholly agree with my hon. Friend about British Rail's losses. I believe that they will be even more far-reaching than the purely financial losses, in that they may well involve losses in freight and passenger business for ever.
Mr. Meacher
Is the Prime Minister aware that for a mere £500 snoopers will be able to obtain private and [column 858]confidential information from personal, medical, financial and police records on her or on any Member of the House or indeed any citizen of this country? Is that not utterly wrong? Will the Prime Minister give a guarantee that the Government will not only introduce a White Paper on this subject, but will also legislate on this matter within the next 12 months?
The Prime Minister
I saw the newspaper report this morning. I share the hon. Gentleman's distaste that this information should be available. My right hon. Friend William Whitelawthe Home Secretary will be introducing a White Paper this year. We agree that legislation is urgent. I hope that it will come forward in the next Session of Parliament.